Landgericht Frankfurt am Main sentenced for wrong advice to a Lehman certificate with judgment of the 03.06.2011 Commerzbank AG 2-19 O 77/10 has the Landgericht Frankfurt am main the Commerzbank in one of our Member Kai Malte Lippke, Leipzig, for an investor-led lawsuit sentenced, to pay damages, because she contracted that she made a profit of 3.5% of the purchase price through the resale of Lehman certificates approximately 24,300 EUR. Commerzbank itself argued that she obtained the certificates for a 3.5% lower purchase price of Lehman Brothers when she resold them to investors. Thereon Commerzbank would need to enlighten the Court considers investors. The Court in its judgment, that a bank from a consulting contract is obliged to inform customers clearly about existing conflicts of interest, to enable them to verify the appropriateness of the advice itself. For the duty of disclosure was not crucial as a bank is a Remuneration achieved, whether through kickbacks, commissions or margins, but whether it is in a conflict between their duty to offer its customers only the best and most appropriate investments, and their interest in a possible high profits. Because such a conflict to profit margins, the Bank must enlighten and clearly their customers the amount of the profit margins.
Also, the obligation to disclose profit margins even in the interest of effective investor protection is necessary. After the verdict, the Commerzbank must the investors the entire purchase price train to train against assignment of claims under the probably worthless Lehman certificates completely replace. The verdict is not yet final. It must be expected that Commerzbank at the Frankfurt higher regional court to appeal. However the appeal’s prospects for success would be doubtful, as the 17th and 19th Senate of the Oberlandesgericht Frankfurt consider it not relevant, on which a payment will receive a Bank, but on the existence of place a conflict of interest. Also the higher regional court of Cologne with judgment of the 04.05.2011 13 U 165/10, decided that a bank that does not get certificates for their customers, but from their own stock they sold you, has to pay damages if she don’t enlighten about this. Victims should be necessarily pursue therefore their claims by a lawyer specializing in banking law and capital market law.